Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I've built an alternative to Github

blog.codeplane.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 198 posts

Re: Why I've built an alternative to Github

#121

Post by grandalf »

This is a very desirable use case. For those who don't get it, I'd say the following:

- it's nice to use git for all the small side projects one creates, but putting all of them on github is crazy expensive if you like keeping your musings private (though not necessarily b/c you're committed to a closed source ideology :)

- the cost factor creates an incentive to misuse git (not using submodules where appropriate) just to save money.

- There are a lot of awesome Git UI programs that run locally on my laptop, gitk is one.

- FWIW his fills the niche between github and gist.

Re: Why I've built an alternative to Github

#122

Post by cool-RR »

Lewisham wrote: post #116
cool-RR wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I really don't see why you are knocking the OP for making something that fits his (and presumably others) needs." I'm making the case that it doesn't fit his needs, since his reluctance of paying the GitHub price is an example of this: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/apps

...and now you are reading into what you think people's spending habits are, based on an Oatmeal comic? What's your problem?

"What's your problem?"

I'm curious about the OP's logic. I believe I found a hole in it and I'm curious whether I have made a mistake or he did, and I'll be happy if he'll point out my mistake if I have one.

Re: Why I've built an alternative to Github

#123

Post by bruceboughton »

jpeterson wrote: post #104
mechanical_fish wrote: post #102

I don't understand this use case: These projects are mainly side projects, or small freelance jobs I've done through the years, and I want to save them for posterity; who knows when I'll need them, right? My solution to this problem is called tar . Just clone the Git repos to /tmp, tar up the results, and push the tarball to S3. Done. Archived for posterity for a few cents per month. This isn't SVN anymore: It doesn'…

I imagine part of the use case is "quickly and easily getting back to a snippet within one of those old files", in which case the tarball and archive method won't really work.

He's talking about tarring a local git repository. You can still use all the git history stuff, you're just backing up using tar rather than via git push/pull.

Re: Why I've built an alternative to Github

#124

Post by rawsyntax »

jpeterson wrote: post #104
mechanical_fish wrote: post #102

I don't understand this use case: These projects are mainly side projects, or small freelance jobs I've done through the years, and I want to save them for posterity; who knows when I'll need them, right? My solution to this problem is called tar . Just clone the Git repos to /tmp, tar up the results, and push the tarball to S3. Done. Archived for posterity for a few cents per month. This isn't SVN anymore: It doesn'…

I imagine part of the use case is "quickly and easily getting back to a snippet within one of those old files", in which case the tarball and archive method won't really work.

I keep a local copy of old git repos on my harddrive. I backup my harddrive religiously. Provided you don't have giant repos, this works well

Re: Why I've built an alternative to Github

#125

Post by rawsyntax »

encoderer wrote: post #83
micheljansen wrote: post #49

While I do agree that Github leaves space for a model like this, I think the value of Github is that it offers a great community and awesome toolset (online and offline). Then I read this: "I also wanted to do almost everything from my terminal, so I built a CLI, that you can use to manage repositories, public keys and collaborators. For daily usage, you probably won't have to go to our web interface ever again, and…

I still use SVN for a lot of my own personal projects (don't judge me!) and sure I could setup my own SVN server no problem. But I pay a small fee ($50 a year I think.. or maybe $50/6-mos) for SVN hosting. Same situation: I want private repo's. Past that, the only other thing I really want is not to have to worry about ANYTHING. It needs to be secure, backed-up, and quick, without me ever having to give it a 2nd thou…

Try out git-svn

Re: Why I've built an alternative to Github

#127

Post by frederickcook »

mechanical_fish wrote: post #102

I don't understand this use case: These projects are mainly side projects, or small freelance jobs I've done through the years, and I want to save them for posterity; who knows when I'll need them, right? My solution to this problem is called tar . Just clone the Git repos to /tmp, tar up the results, and push the tarball to S3. Done. Archived for posterity for a few cents per month. This isn't SVN anymore: It doesn'…

this is an active project, and can the team really not afford to pay Github something like $5 per month per repo?

This is the OP's complaint: once you're over 20 private repositories, you're paying $100/month. He wants stupid-simple, hosted, private git repositories, and lots of them. He probably ran a bunch of numbers on servers, storage, and bandwidth, and found that he run a simple, low-cost hosted git solution (without all the fancy web features) at a fraction the cost.

There was an opportunity in the market to make a simple, low-cost competitor to github, and he built it. Kudos.

Re: Why I've built an alternative to Github

#128

Post by evlapix »

mechanical_fish wrote: post #102

I don't understand this use case: These projects are mainly side projects, or small freelance jobs I've done through the years, and I want to save them for posterity; who knows when I'll need them, right? My solution to this problem is called tar . Just clone the Git repos to /tmp, tar up the results, and push the tarball to S3. Done. Archived for posterity for a few cents per month. This isn't SVN anymore: It doesn'…

Technically, yes.. waving your command line wand IS a solution. But also, technically, there isn't any reason why you shouldn't be able to keep 100+ small remote git repositories active for less than $100/month.

Also, Github doesn't require you to know how to use tar, S3, or have any other Linux experience. So why should this particular use case? Why wouldn't a business be able to cater to that market?

This is a business, and as such, should be measured as one. Why are we criticizing the "technical necessity" of the product? Are we under the impression that HN is the target audience?

Re: Why I've built an alternative to Github

#129

Post by xbryanx »

cool-RR wrote: post #71
xbryanx wrote: post #62

I am currently frustrated with Github's private repository hosting plans. When I switched from SVN to Git, what was initially one repository became six, because of Git's "you can't checkout part of a repo" philosophy. So now, I have to buy a fairly expensive plan even though my usage is pretty small. Cheers, to you for adding some competition to the marketplace. I hope it provides some pricing pressure on Github one…

I find $12 a month to be really cheap.

And it is, if you somehow have less than 10 private repos. I personally have over 25, and our group has over 50...putting us in the $100/month range
Post reply on HN